Back to Squawk list
  • 59

FAA urges ICAO to address erosion of 'manual' piloting skills

The meeting kicks off as the aviation industry continues grappling with pilot training and automation questions that have simmered for years but became salient following several accidents, including but not limited to recent crashes of two Boeing 737 Max. ( 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

I have the a problem with my cellphone!

Surprise, surprise! It's called BLOATWARE! Loading a machine with stuff you don't need and will never use in the either your lifetime or the expected useful life of the equipment!

Stuff this younger generation loves to add on and is so enamoured with!

My flying started with a inherently stable airframe and a powerplant that we knew the limitations of. Days before GPS, when a map, compass and clock (several, for redundancy) kept us safe and on track.

And my instructors words of wisdom - the best pilot on board is YOU!

Until Artifical Intelligence can do a helluva lot more than just beat a grand master at chess, the ulimate fallback must always be - Pull the plug. Switch it off. Go back to basics.

Use that God given gift called the human brain that is still today the best tool we know in the whole Universe, and put men safely on the moon.

Happy landings all you guys with wings.
Ken Lane 7
Wolfgang Langewiesche's teaching is no less relevant today than it was eighty years ago.

Good luck convincing all the computer operators with an airman certificate of this.
I have been saying this for years. I call it skills atrophy. If you don't exercise the skill set, you will lose the skill. I was a Boeing 757 instructor pilot for 17 years at a major airline. On the line and in the simulator, you could see it in their eyes when it came to disconnecting the A/P and A/T. I always felt pilots were not afraid, but reluctant to disconnect because they feared embarrassment of a demonstration of skills not practiced. It manifests itself negatively more during an emergency. They try to use the A/P when the situation demands hand flying. The other reason to disconnect is it's FUN. You have to be skilled in both autopilot usage and hand flying. That's the job! ( that includes Autothrottle)
My very first flight instructor back in the 60's always said. Follow your checklists and "Fly the Bloody Plane!Nothing else matters" Sadly we are now in age where pilots should be applying this rule, but are not able to in a lot of cases.
Mr. Spruce, you are so right.
Those were the days when pilots actually flew planes.
As an aspiring student pilot my CFI said the same exact words.
"Repetitively, drilling into my head, the importance of pilot skill...
Then came instrument training in actual IMC conditions, I don't know if anyone trains that way today.
I took my instrument checkride in actual IMC. Ah, the good old days.
I already made my basic airmanship rant some time ago somewhere else on FlightAware so I'll do the very short version...we are discussing no longer teaching stall recovery because of several crashes during instruction. We need to support the instructors in learning and teaching stall recovery, and quite frankly, I think the ideal (not realistic but I'll say it anyway) would be for ALL pilots to have at least a couple hours of basic aerobatics. The best way to learn to drive in the wintertime is to find a big open parking lot after the first snow and feel what it is like to skid and slide. The best way not to freak out and pull the yoke when you should push it in an upside down emergency is to fly upside down under controlled circumstances and feel what it is like.
Reference the other aspect of this conversation - the technical challenges facing airline pilots - I am a VFR single engine pilot so I am not qualified to speak in depth about specifics, but when technology seems to be interfering as opposed to helping, do what all of our instructors said to all of us repeatedly and justifiably..."Fly the airplane!"
My company (flying heavies) has added upset recovery training, as a independent sim session, to the annual recurrent training. I have to do my first one next month but from what I here it also includes a lot of pitch/power/scan type flying. Should be interesting as the scan really does errode when zeroed in on the flight director all the time.
No question that upset training is invaluable. However, getting a heavy jet out of an upset takes a lot more altitude than than a very light aerobatic aircraft and usually you wind up with a bent airplane as a result. Hand flying up and down to altitude is fine and should keep most drivers sharp, but hand flying a heavy across the atlantic maintaining +/- 100’ is exhausting and now with RVSM it’s not allowed.
Very true Highflyer1950...commercial aircraft are not known for having a great roll rate! You are also correct in saying that we cannot and should not throw technology out the window. we have to find that perfect balance between stick flying airmanship and tech airmanship. I have an immense amount of respect for pilots that have to know all of the systems of an airliner. Even if we take away what tech we think might be over complication, we are still left with aircraft that are a challenge to know inside and out under routine operation, let alone in the midst of a sudden emergency.
Thanks for the insight. I agree.
Many years ago I took 5 hours of aerobatic and unusual attitude recovery training. Not because I wanted to be an aerobatic pilot but because I wanted to experience what it felt like if I ever (God forbid) got myself into an "unusual attitude" and most importantly, how do i get out of it!
Exactly right, Ken! Aerobatics are commonly associated with competition and entertainment. We need to also look at aerobatics as a valuable tool for good airmanship.
I know it is a film, but the scene from "The Right Stuff", where the couple are arguing about a recent crash w/ a test pilot is as relevant today as then. The wife says, "You know what happened, the machine just broke!" The husband replies "It is not the machine, it is the man, the guy was dead before he went up." I would love to see younger pilots try to use a good old-fashioned chart & Jeppsen plotter today & not a handheld GPS unit.
crk112 7
I'm a young pilot... less than 35... people look at me crazy when I tell them I prefer round gauges and NDB & VOR navigation over glass panels and GPS.
And may you never run out of alcohol for your windscreen.
Yep -nothing wrong with that for sure. Don't get me wrong - I'm actually part technogeek...I remember being all excited the first time I upgraded my desk top memory from two 4MB chips to two 8MB chips for an awesome total of 16MB of memory! Tech can be a great friend. GPS is a wonderful tool including in an emergency (i.e. "Nearest Airport" feature), but I ALWAYS keep a chart open on my lap and I follow it as I go in case I have an electrical failure, but also so I don't forget how to read and use it. I don't know that an airline Captain or First Officer would or should be expected to do exactly the same, but being ready with some reasonable facsimile of being prepared to do it the old fashioned way cannot hurt.
Again, to support Highflyer1950's points - airline pilots must be completely familiar with multiple complex systems in addition to what stick and rudder skills we argue they should have. Out of respect for those who do, I have to express admiration and amazement at our phenomenal safety record which reflects how many men and women ARE managing their aircraft well.
My son (ATP Captain) and I (ASEL, Instrument, High Performance, Complex, Tail Dragger) were just talking about this. The differences between "flying" the airplane and "twisting knobs". Bottom line is, one still has to be able to "fly it".
Exactly. I would much rather call myself a pilot than a professional button pusher. Ugh!
A student of mine that went to the majors startled me when I asked him how he liked it when he upgraded to Captain to the 737. He said "it's just a system, I just get in, buckle up and hang on".
nofossil70 11
I had 6000 hours of airliner flying before having a autopilot. Now students starting with autopilot on first flight.
I flew for Rocky Mountain Airways In Denver Colorado and I remember in ground school when they took us to the hangar to see the DHC6 Twin Otters and in the cockpit a new hire (FNG they called us)asked where the autopilot was and the instructor laughed and said it sits in the right seat and gets $750 a month. All hand flying heavy weather low mins unbelievable turbulence and icing all winter long. I don't believe Rocky Mountain ever had a pilot error accident.
Ken Lane 2
My students never had use of George. Heck, I called half the panel disabled with exception of knowing how to use it before solo. But I mandated all flying be by hand.
While I don't own or fly a TAA, I do have some glass and an autopilot. Nonetheless I still hand fly most of my flights, I know how to do accelerated, power off and power on stalls to the full stall and recovery which I continue to practice. The main rule of aviation is "Fly the Plane" everything else is secondary. Systems analysts are great, but an airplane needs foremost a pilot.
I would say to this...most certainly!computers and machines were meant to be an"assist" to pilots,and not to replace them..passengers appreciate technology,but its human nature to feel more secure if there are a couple of people capable of handling problems or issues when flying!
May I add that the complexity of today’s regulations contribute to automation dependency. A good example is noise abatement. We are forced to fly paths so precise to avoid complaints that most companies require automation on all RNAV SIDs. In some cases STARs were deleciped that older aircraft autopilots couldn’t keep up with ... a few in ATL gave the MD aircraft a run for the money and they had to delay implementation for a while.

I would much rather hand fly a departure to 18,000 feet but often times am required by SOP to automate (as long as safe to do so).
That would be TERPs. How many guys these days know what is is, let alone have ever read any of it? The implementation of MNP sids and stars is all part of the Next Gen push,as you well know, and ADS-B out requirements will ground a significant fleet of older airplanes soon. The automation is here to stay and is, IMHO, in part designed to enable the ab initio to participate in his or her airline career because the qualified pilot well is dry. Ode to Kit Darby. they never truly would have the self confidence to hand fly the airplane to 18'0 cause they have never done it! The pressure in the sim. now is to learn the automation and Don't turn it off. Not, what to do when it turns itself off. The pilot wanted boards are flooded with big money ads for U.S., Brit., Euro. qualified captains to go fly in China and third world countries with ab inition pilots in what amounts to a single pilot part 121 operation. And in China they had better be sharp on IP's because the most egregious limit to vis. there is smog at the surface. This response below yours is clearly "preachin to the choir". Glad I'm retired. nice Falcon 50.
Transitioned out of DC-3's & 4's to the Herc. Typed for AN-2's. Happy PILOT, end of story.
Gliders are an answer - a few hours in gliders teaches raw piloting skills, is inexpensive, is FUN, and instills the love of flying. Love flying and the rest is easy. Let the commercial skills come from the schools that teach button pushing.
That is what saved Sully's butt.
Not to mention the Gimli Glider
So many posts here place blame on the pilots in each of the incident examples. I believe we would be better to focus on training systems and revising them. From my observation, the SIM training, both equipment and instruction, is too far displaced from real world flying. I ask a director of one of the Flight Safety facilities recently if the goal of my training was to make safer pilots or complete a checklist of tasks established by governing bodies. The reply was "its always been that way". Well then why is there any confusion about why we replicate the same mistakes? The FAA urging ICAO and changing their own requirements could be a great step in the right direction
this probably won't happen, but new hire airline pilots, besides having some 1500 hours, more or less, ought to be required to have a few hundred gilder hours, actual IMC flight time no auto-pilot, some acrobatic instruction: at least two of those ideals, so as to instill the semblemce of pilotage. The generations of military pilots that flew the stearman or the texan all benefited from those balkly aircraft that required full attention to maintaining control, then they could fly the more complex birds once they got the ground school.
I see what your saying here. Kind of the intent of the “power off 180” (commercial requirement), “spin training” (CFI requirement). Actual IMC is asked on some applicatikns versus simulated instrument but it is not enforced.

Simply checking a box isn’t always the best approach to truly mastering the skill.
Great article in the NYT by William Langewiesche (anyone who doesn't recognize that name has no business reading this page) bemoaning the lack of airmanship that (among other things) brought down the 2 MAXes.
I retired with 23,000+ hours. No accidents or incidents, many grateful pax. I never heard of this gent but I feel I am qualified to read this page sonny.
You are most certainly qualified to read this page. But maybe not so much to fly less than FAR 25 aircraft.
simstick 1
Here is the best explanation yet. Juan faults blaming the pilots for bad systems design and the training/experience requirements overseas. I think he is a 777 pilot and former 737 and prior AF.
Michael, I agree, but remember most modern pilots have never actually touched a stick or rudder
Rich Boddy -7
I have never heard of that name in my life. You can kindly fuck off good sir.
Ken Lane 4
Anyone who has ever had a serious job in teaching flight instruction would know the name.
Wolfgang yes, not his opinionated son!
Ken Lane 2
If you've heard of the father it's not a stretch to consider a current name may be the son or grandson. By far, it's not a common name associated with aviation.
What do you expect when Management wants/expects you to use the AP as much as possible. Pilots should resist that and hand fly as much a possible to stay sharp!
Not knowing all the ins and outs of many of the reported stories, yet it does seem to me that many of the accidents are the result of lack of basic airmanship. Things that are learned from the first hour of flight instruction. Like recognizing and avoiding or getting out of stalls.
Airline pilots today typically have there hands on the controls for about 3 or so minutes flying from point A to Point B. They rotate, get the gear up, clean up the bird, and then go on auto pilot for the entire trip and not put there hands back on the controls until on finial at there destination. Basic flying skills are eroding.
Very well put, Gary. I have said for years, stop putting so damn much automation into the birds. It's fine to have computers help: If I want nose help it can help me, nose down same thing, turn port or starboard same. But let pilots fly the damn things, not the things flying the pilots!!
It is about time. Hours in the cockpit does not mean actual flying time experience.
Fly the plane don’t let it fly you....
That's exactly the point!!
themold 3
Question ... Are you a pilot or an AVIATOR? There is a huge difference.
a pilot...
Soon after the second MAX accident, I posted the question something like "could US major airline pilots fly a MAX completely manually say from DFW to DEN?"

As I recall, the answer was something like "some pilots could but I would have a hard time getting volunteers!"
In reality that could apply to any type, and any rated pilot. I think there are cultural issues related to junior pilots challenging the Captain across the world but the idea that non US trained pilots are somehow "inferior" is incorrect. The measure that is applied by ICAO (I believe) is the history and record of the airline, and the restrictions imposed on their ability to fly to European and NA destinations.
Korean Air Lines had such a poor CRM reputation due to a spate of accidents that the US military forbade it’s personnel to fly on KAL until they got their program up to snuff. A lot of it (especially on Asian airlines, but also the Tenerife Disaster on the part of the KLM cockpit) is cultural not questioning the PIC on their actions.
Was that before the B52 crash at Fairchild or after?
bbabis -4
The ICAO "Multi-Crew-Pilot License" is defacto proof that many or most non US pilots lack training. The 9-11 19 probably had more training than many third world pilots today. The basics of airmanship are never learned and in time you have an untrained captain training first officers to be just as bad.
I am going to assume that you believe that ONLY US born stratght whilte male pilots (I qualify for 3 of the 4) are capable of being traind to fly commercial aircraft, and the implication is that everywhere other than the USA is considered "third world". Next item on the checklist. Place head back in the sand or some other dark place.
bbabis 3
I think you added your own bias in there Andy. I said nothing about a capability limit for pilots of any nationality. With proper training, any person in any country can become a proficient pilot. The problem is the limited training they are getting, that meats ICAO standards, so that their airlines can get butts in the front end.
Actually Bill, you did. "The ICAO "Multi-Crew-Pilot License" is defacto proof that many or most non US pilots lack training." In other words, if not from the US, most of us lack proper training.
bbabis 1
In other words?? ... Don't put words that were never there into other's statements and then be offended by those statements. I'll say again, and please pay attention this time, that it is a lack of training and not capability that affects many foreign airline operations.
No one put any word's into that statement! I paid attention the first time along with a few others and I WILL say this again as it came FROM YOUR FINGERS!! "The ICAO "Multi-Crew-Pilot License" is defacto proof that many or most non US pilots lack training." It IS the very first line in your comment, and IS offensive to me as a non US pilot!!
Glad I got a downvote for standing up for myself!! The next time you want to put down ANY pilot who is not US trained....DON'T!!
bbabis 1
I'm sorry I must be over your head on this one. Fly safe and blue skies.
Not at made it as blunt as daylight..the fact is this part could have been left out "or most non US " and point would be very well received!
So accusing someone of being a homophobe for no reason whatsoever is just fine, but using the phrase "many or most".... now THAT is offensive and insulting. Shame on Bill.

I'm getting the distinct impression that many or most non us-trained pilots are oversensitive, easily offended, and hypocritical.
Where did I accuse anyone of being a homophobe? AND it wasn't the phrase "many or most", if you could open your eyes and read! It WAS "or most non US" Since you clearly deciided to switch around my words to suit your grandeur style, it's clear that you think only US trained pilots know how to handle an aircraft?

I'm getting the distinct impression you could not give a rat's ass about the rest of the world's pilots, because they lack training! Easily offended, not in the least.
(I think he was referring to Bill's comment and just posted under yours)
Andy: "I am going to assume that you believe that ONLY US born stratght whilte male pilots (I qualify for 3 of the 4) are capable of being traind to fly commercial aircraft"

You replied: "Thanks Andy, for beating me to it"
Nice that you leave out the whole post, and only pick the parts you feel need to throw it back in people's faces with. Next time you want to quote a post, QUOTE the whole damn thing!
THEN you can see why I said what I did!
Seems kind of redundant since we can just scroll up, but ok here you go.

Andy: "I am going to assume that you believe that ONLY US born stratght whilte male pilots (I qualify for 3 of the 4) are capable of being traind to fly commercial aircraft, and the implication is that everywhere other than the USA is considered "third world". Next item on the checklist. Place head back in the sand or some other dark place."

You replied: "Thanks Andy, for beating me to it"
JR Lazar 1
US commercial pilots are required to have 1500 hours and an ATP certificate. Non US pilots need only 240 hours, 210 of which can be in a simulator. Do you want to fly with someone that has flown only 30 hours of actual flight time? It took me almost 60 to be able to solo. THAT is what Bill was saying.
If I recall correctly it was possible in the UK to get your Private certificate in 30 hours (not many managed that) at a CAA approved school. Otherwise it was a minimum of 40. I am equally sure that you could not get your Instrument, and Commercial certificates or ratings in a simulator. There may be some countries (I am not aware of any) where your scenario is possible but I suspect that would be a very small minority. Some airlines are not allowed to fly in European airspace (and probably NA and Canadian airspace) because of poor safety records and sloppy maintenance, and that is as it should be. I do not believe that the US os the only place that has standards above the 240 hours experience as you suggest
JR Lazar 1
bbabis 0
Not just possible Andy. It's happening right now. The copilot on Ethiopian Air 302 had 200 hours of flight time and it was not his first trip! He may very well have been capable of being the next Neil Armstrong but how much airmanship could he have in that time?
Ken Lane 1
At the time I was working on my instructor ticket, I saw Indian students leaving after 50 hours of multi and 250 total time returning to take a right seat in an A300 series bird.

I was once asked to step in and go along with one student to take their commercial ride. Their procedures scared the hell out of me from not having a clue what the routing would be to taking out a chart and unfolding it while taxiing. He nearly got lost trying to get there and I let him though I don't think he learned a dang thing from his severe lack of preparation.

It reinforced the ticket mill concept with foreign students. I tried to have a higher opinion of the school but this didn't help.

I lacked my own knowledge as I learned over time. Luckily, I had intervention from a DPE who was once a close friend to Bill Kershner. I did learn and developed high standards and expected more from my students.

I throw out these same standards on a few pilot pages and am met with not the greatest response. All I can think is I'm glad they're not 121/135 pilots nor should they ever be one.
The US is NOT the only country with heavy flight rules for commercial and that 1500 hr rule has only been around 6 yrs...previous to that it was only 250 combined..those 1500 hrs, as set forth by the FAA to be able to fly commercial, are not set in stone. If you have a certain degree, ex-military or have rotor wing, it's less flight time.
I AM a non US pilot, must have my PPL first, must have a minimum 300hrs flight instruction for CPL itself (very little simulator), pass medical, and since TC has instituted the airlines have a set minimum flight time, most are 2000hrs. If I want to fly Jazz Aviation, it's 750 minimum and that puts me SIC into a DHC Q400.
So please QUIT with this "non US pilots" BS...agreed a minority of countries have garbage rules for commercial flight, BUT the majority of us "non US pilots" do not!
THAT is what I was saying!
This is what I have been trying to (unsuccessfully) explain. Thank you for your eloquence. Over generalizations do not help the cause. Thank you.
JR Lazar 1
I can understand, based on this, why you are defensive. By your own admission, not all countries have such rigorous standards. The pilots of both Lion Air and Ethiopia that were involved in the 787Max tragedies...did they have a lot of hands on hours, and in particular in that aircraft? I'm not slamming anyone, so please don't slam me. I'm only saying I personally would prefer that ALL pilots, from ALL countries, have rigorous requirements and experience. You are right, it took the Buffalo NY tragedy to have our flight requirements increased to 1500 hours. Prior to that, most commercial pilots came out of the military and had plenty of experience. I see nothing wrong with wanting to know, for certain, before I climb on any airplane or airline, that the pilots are competent and capable. Sorry for you, if you personally feel lumped in with others that don't have that training.
Ah but you were slamming, not just myself but other non US pilots, and perhaps do not realize it! Instead of "Non US pilots", it would have been better if it was placed "a minority of countries pilot's". The way both Bill and yourself worded it, only the US pilots have a strong flight time regiment.
Remember it was not all that long ago the US had the same requirements as some "minority" countries (those that do not have a heavy hand when it comes to obtaining an ATP) & it took a severe accident for the FAA to open it's eyes. Perhaps, when the 2 full reports come out for Lion Air and Ethiopian accidents, these "minority" countries will step up and mandate stricter policies.
You do this well
bbabis 0
Thank you JR. Certainly spelling it out helps.
Andy, is your reply to Bill Babis, or someone else?
Bill Babis
djames225 -2
Thanks Andy, for beating me to it.
The 737 Max is dynamically unstable: something not anticipated during the design, but because of decisions made by Boeing! They could have extended the landing gear to accommodate the larger engines under the wings, so as not to negatively impact the center of gravity.Instead they opted for changes that moved the thrust moment forward and up!Boeing at the time said a small "automated" compensation was all that was needed.Further flight testing showed that 4 times more corrective was actually needed to compensate. Boeing could not have hidden this from the FAA and the pilots if the cert process was an honest one, but Boeing chose to hide it. Southwest was happy to skip the extra millions in training costs. No software fix can address the over 300 people who are dead. Boeing is STILL producing the aircraft during it's grounding. Why? Influence the FAA, maybe? Or threatening to place itself in bankruptcy should the 737 MAX not be successfully re certified?Lets hope if it is certified, the FAA does it's due diligence this time and independently tests the aircraft, instead of relying on Boeing's "scouts honor" promise that they have resolved their own flawed design! As someone else in this thread mentioned, "Could the aircraft once again fly under some other moniker and under a different type certificate? Maybe. Show me an airworthy aircraft that can operate safely at the original 0.6 degree MCAS authority limit and with the previous-version stabilizer cut-off switch arrangement (allowing computer disconnect from the stabilizer trim separate from main power to same) that passes FAA and international (proved this time by those authorities independently, not asserted by Boeing) certification testing -- which of course comes as a different aircraft type complete with all the training requirements that come with same."
if you lengthen the gear where do put the wheels on retraction? Yes, engines further forward and up changing the thrust line which the FAA flagged because it changed the handling characteristic when compared to other B737 variants and may require an additional type rating. Current operators did not want that so Boeing’s answer (now considered flawed) was MCAS, both in sensor reliability and applied force. Still, had any of the crews identified the problem as a pitch trim runaway, whether it was MCAS or normal pitch trim motor activation the trim cutoff switches memory item would have stopped all trim motion. The fact that activating normal thumb control electric trim in the opposite direction helped but only momentarily until MCAS reset itself when the thumb trim switch was not in use. That allowed MCAS to incrementally drive the elevator to the stops while the pilots trimmed the stab to the stops in the opposite direction. Redline the airspeed and aerodynamic forces take over preventing manual trim operation and the rest is history. My take: should have kept the B757 and updated it? Just my thoughts.
The same place you place the landing gear, now, and on the it's original location. About a month after the Ethiopian accident, a few of us "non credentialed" aircraft engineers (but engineers) went to work using the landing gear assembly design Boeing has on the 10, to prevent tail drag on rotation. (Yes, if the original gear was used, the tails would end up getting sheered if a bit of over rotation occurred) Strengthened the top end section and made it a bit larger diameter. Extended the secondary section 5" with a double collar collapse similar to MAX10's gear. Total gear length achieved: factory plus 11". The engines could have remained where they were on the NG, and would have instilled an additional 1 1/2" more ground clearance than the NG.
The dynamically unstable myth just will not go away.
I guessing this conversation is taking place because of the 737 MAX accidents. Its easy, in hindsight to say piloting skills are the problem. Maybe just look at aviation safety records before saying pilots need more flying skills. The problem, in my humble opinion, goes back to the MAX design and a lot of short sidedness on Boeings part. To many assumptions were made, two many pilots warnings were ignored, to much emphasis on time to market. Modern day heavy commercial aircraft aren't designed to be hand flown from point a to b. Piloting skills are used every flight, from pushback, taxing, takeoff and landing. Why would i want to hand fly a 1000 mi flt by hand? Most in the left seat are very good at what they do.
After reading these comments I sense that the respondents are judging the pilot skills and initial training of the two crashed aircraft as being similar to their own. They were not!
General aviation in Eastern Europe and Asia and SE Asia is illegal! They have no 1500 hours flying a pattern or local cross country flights. They come out of the military where they generally fly single engine trainers and simulators, and while some are good pilots, many are drones with weak English skills and poor pilotage. They train these pilots in sims and computers and when things go awry the pilots simply can't handle it.
Lion Air typically has one rated pilot and one seat warmer, and this example was a combination of abhorrent maintenance and poor pilotage.
Yes, Boeing cut corners by having just one aoa sensor, but the poor pilotage was the real cause. Note that American and Southwest pilots have reported problems and they countered by turning off the a/p and hand flying the plane - smart and well done.
Over generalization of where GA is and is not allowed. I do not know, but I believe Australia and New Zealand are in Asia and I believe it unlikely that "Eastern Europe" is no longer and several formerly Soviet controlled countries and regions are now part of the EU and permit private flight (even if very expensive). An over simplistic and unverified view of a complex issue.

I have been concerned about this for years. I wrote a book "On Being An Airplane Pilot Not An Airplane Driver", but I have not been able to get it published. I spent over 40 years as a flight instructor, bush pilot, commuter airline pilot, and charter pilot, over 35,000 hours mostly flight instructing. I observed a serious lack of stick and rudder skills in some air carrier accidents and my book addresses lack of fundamental skills and misconceptions that get pilots in trouble. If anyone knows how to get my book published and marketed I believe it could have an impact on air safety.
Bryan, see They will guide you through the entire process.
Thank you.
I'm well past my prime, however, I feel I could get out of most situations because I was taught stick, rudder, ball & airspeed meant something! Also had to recover from stalls and unusual attitudes because thats what my instructor taught me!
I am amazed a retired 777 pilot friend told me the Asians and probably lots of others in every country, can't wait to flip on the AP everything and enjoy the view!
in the modern scenario , Techno-Humans are the actual bottelneck of processes created by them and for them. More safe flying in a electrical drone at 61k ft.
Flying by the pants, a vanishing skill....
cowboybob -3
old news...been a problem for a long time...and probably worse now that we have all these simulator pilots added to the mix.
Explanation heard yesterday was ICAO only requires 450 hrs pilot time for 2nd in command with 425 hrs of that allowed to be simulator. If 25 hrs of actual flight time for a 2nd in command is Person doesn't need to be an ATP. I'd hope, which is probably useless, the 2nd in command would be required to at least know most of the manual.
You pick the third paragraph as your synopsis?. Dude, could you be any more obvious? I honestly hope you're getting paid for this, because if not you must be one seriously bored individual.


계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..